About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
gathering purposes since he's been president. when we read these people their miranda rights and give them a lawyer the only way you can gather intelligence is if the terror suspect and the lawyer will allow you to do so. intelligence gathering through plea bargaining is not going to make us safe. jenna: so we spoke to a former member of the fbi on our show yesterday that seems to not have a problem with miranda rights, that is their opinion. we'll see what they get as far as information from this one suspect. >> can i mention something. jenna: please. >> i don't have a problem with miranda rights. this man can only be tried in federal court. he's never eligible for military commissions. a first year law student could convict this person. what i'm worried about is what does he know about future attacks? he's telling us that his brother was the bad guy, he's sort of just along for the ride. they had no international connections. guess what, he's down-playing his involvement. what i am suggesting is that we use the national security legal system where we can interview him without a lawyer to
federal government has done the right thing. when ints that somehow suspects have right to counsel miranda warnings causes them to stop cooperating with law enforcement is not facts and studies. and ct, d.o.j. officials senior law enforcement officials 90% of the ou 80% to time in sophisticated cases when defense counsel get involved to help emhis more and icit more information allow the case to go forward. there have been multiple cases 9/11 that have been prosecuted, investigated and prosecuted by law enforcement resulted in more information available to law lawful tools ing without needing to violate rights. senator mentioned graham. he pushed against the decision the combatant status. [video clip] >> i hope the congress will at this case and look at our laws and come to the to.lusion that i have come we are at war. for a going to be at war very long time and we have to have the tools to defend values.es within our one of those tools is the ability to question people about future attacks to gather intelligence for national purposes without benefit of counsel. the information will neve
with american citizens. it allows the justice department to delay reading a suspect his miranda rights if doing so is in the interest of -- quote -- "public safety." the administration had rightly invoked this public safety exception in the case of the boston suspect which provided our national security professionals a discreet period of time to gather intelligence from the suspect without the presence of his lawyer. however, soon after questioning him this way, the administration recently reversed itself and read the suspect his miranda rights. in doing so, the administration, in my view, gave up a valuable opportunity to lawfully and thoroughly question the suspect for purposes of gathering intelligence about potential future terrorist plots. whether we will be able to acquire such information has now been left entirely at the discretion of the suspect and his lawyer. put simply, the suspect has been told he has the right to remain silent, and if he doesn't want to provide intelligence, he doesn't have to. is this a responsible balance between a citizen's rights and our national security? the
bomber was mirandized within 45 minutes. i don't care if you read people miranda rights. i just don't want you to shut down the intelligence-gathering process. that individual was never designated an enassembly combatant. only way he agreed to cooperate is f.b.i. flew to his family i and his parents convinced him. times square bomber, the times square bombing incident, he had pakistan/taliban ties. read miranda rights, never designated enemy combatant. we never terroristed him for intelligence gathering purposes. osama bin laden's soim, abu gazey is in the federal system today and read miranda rights. never designated enemy combatant. can you imagine what osama bin laden's son-in-law could tell us about the terrorist organizations? he was the spokesman for al qaeda after 9/11. so there's a disturbing pattern here, quite frankly, of not gathering intelligence when that opportunity exists. thank you very much. i have to go. i will get a pen and pad and go next door to answer any questions if you have about the f.b.i. and, again, we're going to absorb a moment of silence here for the f
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)